Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pichilemu political controversies


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete.  Sandstein  07:38, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Pichilemu political controversies

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Local political lore in a place of pop. 14,000; fails WP:NEVENT, coverage is very much restricted to the local newspapers Kraxler (talk) 14:19, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 16:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 16:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 16:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep The controversies were definitely notable to be mentioned in so many news outlet, and even considering the local sources heavily outweigh any national ones, there's not really a requirement for an article to have multiple national sources for the subject of it to be considered notable. It doesn't overuse a single source, it uses multiple sources from many newspapers, which is why I feel it should be kept. SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 17:09, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I suggest you check again the sources. There are dead links, official election department candidates' listings, and a lot of pieces from the Pichilemu local papers. There are about three sources from bigger newspapers for a few particular points, but that doesn't mean that the whole lot gets suddenly notable. See also WP:COATRACK. Kraxler (talk) 17:55, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Kraxler, I suggest you withdraw this nomination. I could even, myself, give you access to El Mercurio web archives (I'm a suscriber) so that you can see yourself there is plenty of coverage on this series of events. Not to mention, La Tercera, El Rancagüino (offline) and other non-local references... (I see you have a problem with local sources) Diego Grez-Cañete (talk) 01:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I suggest you read carefully WP:LASTING, WP:GEOSCOPE and WP:DIVERSE. Kraxler (talk) 01:27, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * These don't have anything to do with this particular article. Diego Grez-Cañete (talk) 01:33, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * They are guidelines applicable to all articles on events. Kraxler (talk) 01:46, 6 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment/Question probably for Diego Grez-Cañete and SuperCarnivore591 who are voting keep on this and other articles: I note that none of these subjects has an article in a Spanish-language Wikipedia, even though it takes place in a Spanish-language country and the sources all seem to be in Spanish. Why is that? There is an article in @es WP on Pichilemu, but it has none of these particulars. Thanks. LaMona (talk) 03:31, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It's probably because the Spanish Wikipedia has less editors than the English Wikipedia does, and no one has gotten around to it (although some Spanish-speaking editors have undoubtedly worked on the article here, as most of the references are written in Spanish). SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 03:38, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I second SuperCarnivore's comment. Also, I have always felt more comfortable editing here than on the Spanish edition, that's why I never got to create articles about these topics there. --Diego Grez-Cañete (talk) 04:04, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Pertinent info can also be found at Articles for deletion/Marta Urzúa and Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 75. Kraxler (talk) 13:04, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think SuperCarnivore591 misunderstood the question. This article does not exist in the Spanish Wikipedia. Why? Because Chilean and Spanish-languages users have long-ago seen trough Diego Grez's biased (albeit sometimes good) editing. Diego Grez many users have blocked in the Spanish Wikipedia. Sietecolores (talk) 10:30, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: WP:GEOSCOPE sums it up, occasional references in non-local sources but not enough impact to pass WP:NEVENT. Vrac (talk) 14:38, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails WP:GNG. -- Keysanger (talk) 14:56, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, too little coverage to justify an article on its own. There is also a WP:BIO concern about the subjects here. This material belongs in the website Memoria pichilemina, not here. Sietecolores (talk) 10:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Inadequate notability--we do not cover local politics to this level of detail.  DGG ( talk ) 05:57, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.